No - it IS about the budget. Also, ending the corrupt /anti-transparent /unsustainable union pension scheme which forces tax payers to line the democrat/union machine coffers. Voters want to save the state and end that money laundering loop.

Legislation recently introduced to the Georgia legislature by House Republican Bobby Franklin would make abortion the legal equivalent of murder and require miscarriages to be investigated by authorities.

Franklin's bill would classify the removal of a fetus from a woman for any reason other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus as "prenatal murder."

Physicians indicted for alleged "prenatal murder" would have their license suspended until they were found innocent of the crime.

Looks like The Queen and her loyal teabagger subjects are on the wrong side again...as usual:

WASHINGTON – Americans decisively support laws ensuring the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions by a nearly two-to-one margin, according to a new USA Today/Gallup poll.

Sixty-one percent said they oppose legislation stripping those rights in their states, as compared to only 33 percent who said they favor such laws, a striking discrepancy that shows public opinion firmly on one side of a growing national fight. Six percent had no opinion.

With such sterling intellects as Collins, Rich, Krugman and Blow on its staff, it's just hard to believe the Times hemorrhages so much cash. But I guess it gives them a unique perspective on deficit spending.

I love all of the local teabaggers whining about how "liberal" this woman is...all the while listening and gobbling down everything coming out of the mouths of Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, O'Reilly, Levine, Savage and the rest of 'em.

The protesters are asking "What's the hurry? Why not sit down and negotiate with the unions?"

Maybe because of this:"Wisconsin law requires that school districts provide final notice by March 15 to individual staff members that their contracts will not be renewed for the following school year. The law also requires that staff receive preliminary notice of the potential layoff at least 15 days before the deadline for final notice."

This deadline, in addition to the fact that union members are working under an extension to their contracts that expires soon, should answer any legitimate concern about why Walker is trying to push this through so quickly.

Gail Collins: I’m not usually a fan of conspiracy theories but Wisconsin is looking less like a budget balancing exercise than an effort by the Republican right — notably the Koch brothers — to destroy the political clout of organized labor, the one large special interest that balances the power of large corporations and super-wealthy investors.

so the Unions were like 12 of the 20 largest donors in 2008 campaign. and corporations always go 60/40 or 40/60 depending on who controls the agenda. as for as big investors? look at how lopsided Goldman Sachs and the rest of the wall street firms were in favor of Obama....

Gail Collins: deficits are killing us when the wealthiest slice of the country is getting richer while paying less and less in taxes.

The share of income taxes paid by the top 5% and top 1% has steadily increased. The bottom quartile makes money on the income tax. LOL

Althouse was real big on the impostor theme not too long ago. Now we know the governor himself admitting he contemplated using troublemakers to infiltrate rallies to make the other side look bad. Now silence. Almost makes you wonder if that was all just bullshit to begin with. Yep, that's what it looks like.

I'd like to hear Ms. Collins mumble that received wisdom in a thick Austrian accent:

Mongol General: Hao! Dai ye! We won again! This is good, but what is best in life? Mongol: The open steppe, fleet horse, falcons at your wrist, and the wind in your hair. Mongol General: Wrong! Conan! What is best in life? Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Mongol General: That is good! That is good.

People like Gail Collins think if they throw enough Lefty buzzwords through the air, the vast Leftist Majority - the entire 20% of the population - will rise as one and drive around the Wisconsin state Capitol honking their horns.

Jeremy said...

Looks like The Queen and her loyal teabagger subjects are on the wrong side again...as usual:

WASHINGTON – Americans decisively support laws ensuring the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions by a nearly two-to-one margin, according to a new USA Today/Gallup poll.

Try again. USA Today polls are legendary for playing with the sample to get the result Al Neuharth wants - and, last I saw, Gallup hadn't released the sample.

# Leviticus 27:6 - A child was only given a value after the age of one month; boys were worth five shekels; girls three. Below the age of one month they were given no monetary value.

# Numbers 3:15 - Only male babies over one month of age were counted as persons during a census. A baby under one month of age and a fetus were not counted as a person.

Numbers 31:17-18 - Moses, under orders from God, ordered the soldiers to kill every boy and non-virgin woman. Many of the latter would be pregnant so their fetus was killed too. Thirty two thousand female virgins were spared because they had value to the men. The fetuses were destroyed, because they were perceived to have no value.

* The Bible contains over 600 laws governing everything from fabrics to how to cut a beard yet contains no law prohibiting abortion. Jesus never mentioned it. As the Oxford Companion to the Bible notes:

Biblical legislation, as in Leviticus 27:3-7, indicates that the lives of children as well as women were not valued as highly as those of adult men, while no value whatsoever was given to a child under the age of one month. There is no indication that a fetus had any status.

It's the new One-Big-Thing-I-Know from which all things make sense for the nonce. Expect to hear it beyond ad nauseam, beyond Jupiter's ad nauseam and back, then around again in continuous circulation until the next One-Big-Thing-I-Know gets picked up and finds currency. It signals the person you're giving attention is susceptible to tropes. The reasonable response is, "Sir, or Madam, have you ever experienced an original thought, and if so, did it hurt?"

On Fox News, Shepard Smith declared that the impasse in Wisconsin is not about the budget, it's about busting the unions and thereby devastating the Democrat's fund raising capabilities. To accomplish this, Walker is taking his direction from the Koch brothers.

Shepard Smith said he's not taking sides, just stating the facts. This is on the network that leftists consider conservative.

Jeremy...You are on point that politicians cannot tell men how much sugar, salt and fat that can be put into their bodies. But there may still be a valid issue of allowing government funding for surgical instruments put into snip the life out of the brain stems of partially newborn men and women. Unless there is no God, in which case murders may be a good thing. Hmmm.

I think that many of we middle class citizens are now just too angry to calmly discuss these events. It now seems time for a NATIONWIDE EMPLOYEE STRIKE, both public and private sector employees! We have met the Libertarian-Republican ENEMY, and the time for negotiatrion has passed. WE MUST DESTROY THEM, philosophically if possible, but if not, then LITERALLY!

"None of this is about budgets. It’s about crushing enemies. Unions. Government programs. The social safety net. Abortion. Contraception."

It depends on what the definition of "this" is, doesn't it? Are we talking about Wisconsin or the end of times?

It's kind of funny to watch the horror stories of the left get pulled in from all over the country and and slabbed into one spleen sandwich. Sure, you start with the story of the day. There's always a Republican somewhere who wants to cut funding for something important. There's always a Republican somewhere who wants to outlaw abortion. There's always some plutocrats not paying enough taxes, and other plutocrats manipulating the system.

Here's how the governor of Wisconsin's neighbor, Illinois, would like to start funding their state pension program: "The No. 4 House Republican in Congress Tuesday shot down Gov. Quinn’s trial balloon of possibly seeking federal help to ease the state’s crushing $86 billion pension shortfall.

"Quinn floated the idea in the fine print of his 2012 budget proposal last week, but U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) began laughing Tuesday when asked about the chances of a federal pension bailout for Illinois and other states with retirement systems that are financially underwater.

“'There is no appetite in the House for a federal guarantee for a state pension obligation. None. It’s a non-starter,' said Roskam, the U.S. House’s chief deputy whip and highest-ranking Republican in Illinois’ congressional delegation."

So if unions won't budge in Wisconsin and the feds won't come in to bail out Illinois, who's going to pay for these generous pension plans? That would fall to the state taxpayers, I guess. Seems fair.

The fact that the Lord knew a "person" was being "formed" in the womb...or that he (or she) ordained it a prophet, has nothing to do with the argument of whether the "fetus" is a person or not.

Sadly it does, it is one of the Biblical hats we Pro-lifers hang our hats on…And since you’re all on about Biblical support for Public Policy, I guess you will join us on the Right in OPPOSITION to Gay Marriage, because Jesus DID, explicitly, discuss what marriage was and its purpose, and further you support any move to restrict DIVORCE as Jesus spoke explicitly against it, right? Now that you’re onto the Bible being the basis for Public Policy…..

Please humor an ignorant commenter such as myself and explain to me, as best you might, how the fetus magically transforms from a "non-person" of uncategorizable status to a person by moving a few inches. To hear the details of this incredible process would be, I think, fascinating.

Even Andrew Cuomo of all people is talking about taking it to the public employee unions. When a big rat like that is running off the ship you might want to see if there is a seat in the life boat. Just sayn'

Where in the world did the abortion debate enter into this discussion--my only thought is the fabled dr Kermit Gosnell of Philadelphia--now there is the abortionist on steroids--made even worse because the dude is black and is murdering live birth babies--now THAT is the face of abortion and its supporters. cant wait for this trial to start and planned parenthood, now, MODO, and the rest of the drooling feminists come to his defense

a snip here a snip there everywhere a snip as long as it severs the spinal cord.

Getting stream-of-consciousness-y is always a risk when engaged in a monologue. Happily, only the New York Times editorial board can serve up a monologue between two people.

In a proper interview, a disinterested authority offers prompts and beseeches clarifications when things get nutty. Nothing Collins said raised red flags for Brooks, so of course things went off the rails. They gave us a fair warning, though, in the little nonsensical prologue of Brooks's e-mail account being hacked--amusing to nobody but Collins and Brooks.

I am curious then, when is it that this non-person fetus "evolves" into a person fetus if not at birth? If it is a process rather than a sudden change, perhaps you could give me some idea of when the fetus is, say, 49% non-person and 51% person, making it more person than non-person and therefore worthy of not being killed on a whim?

Freeman--I cant tell you when, but in the case of Gosnell, is he guilty of murder? a live birth "fetus" now a person has its spinal cord "snipped" sound like murder to me--and it gets to your point about fetal development.

Some day, and it would be great if it arrived before I'm 60, I will understand why I go to work every day at dawn in order to have enough money to send to the government to give to people whom Gail Collins supports (but doesn't deign to entertain or know), all of whom think I'm a bad guy.

Repeat: I send six figures each year to the feds so that they can give the money to people who hate who I am and what I do and what I stand for; and this is logical, and sensible, and moral ... because? I think that it's fine if they hate me; they should get their spending money elsewhere, however.

Collins is sitting there knocking down some crummy $150K or $200K writing these columns for a broke newspaper about people she doesn't know (she's earning what a good 29 year-old software engineer makes), and we're supposed to pay attention?

I do like the Wednesday food section in the Times. Great story today on shaved beef.

I'd subscribe to the NYT if I could only get the food, arts, books, and design sections. But NO. I have to pay for people like Collins and Herbert and Krugman.

@Freeman: It's all semiotics. For instance, some clump of cells walked up to me yesterday and asked me for the time. So I hit it in the face with a shovel.

When Progressive thought migrated from continental Europe to America, it dragged along its spinster sisters Structuralism and Semiotics. Therefore most progressives labor under the delusion that reality is predicated on words. Calling it a clump of cells makes it so. Now let's wash our hands of that whole mess.

Touche Delayna! Excellent riposte! And Freeman, it might help to remind Jeremy that the Chinese are ahead of us in this aspect of the game--they count one's time in the womb as part of one's corporeal age.. and they're not even Christian!

Jesus never talked about cars or the Internet, so I guess they are all safe from discussion, too, eh?Funny, though, isn’t it, when you start getting the Bible thrown back at you, you’re all, “I’m an ATHEIST and don’t believe….” You like it when you think you can confound your “stoopit” “teabagger” foes, who are Soooooo Stoopit, the Brill-yant Jeremey will simply heave a few random verses of the Bible at them and silence them…sorry it didn’t work out for you that way.

Gail Collins: None of this is about budgets. It’s about crushing enemies. Unions. Government programs. The social safety net. Abortion. Contraception.Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes... Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave! Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! David Brooks: All right, all right! I get the point!

And the Koch Brothers....I've never heard of them until just recently. In fact, when they first came up, I thought ..."Oh, yeah. Those guys who made Fargo and True Grit."

My view of them is that they are George Soros of the right, except maybe only about 20% of the later.

As usual, everything is projection on the left. They know how important Soros and his ilk are to funding the Democrats and all their support groups, and assume that the Republicans have to have comparable people. And the only names that pop up are the Koch brothers, and so, a political meme is born.

Getting back to Gail, it is all about money, both the money that the states don't have to support former government workers, as well as their party. The biggest contributors to the Democrats are not George Soros, Hollywood, environmental wackos, etc., but government employee unions. And those unions have all that money to buy legislators because of the automatic checkoff. The WI teachers apparently pay somewhere around $1,000 a year in union dues - except that they never see it. It goes straight from the state or local government to the union, and then a bulk of that money is spent electing Democrats so that the government workers can get more money, and in particular, better benefits out of the state. I think it was Taranto yesterday who said that it wasn't collective bargaining, but rather, collective corruption.

Without all the government employee union money and election foot soldiers, the Democrats know that they are going to be in very bad shape in coming elections.

That is what it is all about - whether or not the Republicans can clean up this corruption, or if the Democrats can hold on to their biggest funding source.

And Jeremy: who holds the portion of the legislative branch where money bills originate? I am quite happy with the current turn of events and will be even happier after the 2012 election where I suspect the legislative branch will be totally in republican hands--and for the record I do hope that Mr Obama gets reelected--grid lock is a wonderful thing. It means the government cant fuck with us too much.

Roger, I'm exploring Jeremy's belief that a fetus is not a person... until it is a person. It's what he believes happens within the "... " area that I'm interested in.

Don't hold your breath. The legal distinction he is trying to make makes to logical sense. You can have live births at 6 months gestation, and then you can have fetuses in the womb at 9 months. And, in an emergency, the fetus in the womb can become a baby in just a couple of minutes with an emergency C-section. So, somehow the 6 month premie deserves personhood and protection against being intentionally killed, while the much more advanced 9 month full term fetus deserves none.

I don't think it makes much sense, unless you get totally tied up in the feminist idea that women should have absolute power over their bodies, even if it means killing almost full term fetuses that would be healthy and normal if born.

Well no, Jeremy not exactly--a sperm qua sperm is just a wet spot on the bed--now a sperm united with an ovum does create an organism which will, as you rightly point out will evolve--thru the process of mitosis--into ultimately a new born infant

but you did not address Freeman's question--when in that process of evolution should (if at all) that organism receive some kind of legal protection? Or are you a Dr Gosnell kind of guy?

Freeman asked a good question and you shucked and jived your way around an answer. Bad show son.

Yeah, who is Gail Collins and why should I care? Unless she's truly as paranoid as she sounds and will try to kill us all.

David Brooks fails to confront Collins on her paranoid globalization of the situation. Rather he tosses a softball, " See how quickly budget issues turn into culture wars? That’s the road to gridlock."

Collins and her ilk are turning it into a culture war. There's no doubt in the mind of any reasonable and informed person we need to get government spending and debt under control. If they don't like the way Walker's doing it, come up with a better solution.

"How about if, without the abortion, the woman imminent death is involved? "

To answer your question, the Mishneh (Oholos 7:6) tells us that in the case of a dangerous pregancy, the fetus may if truly necessary be cut up within the womb and removed.

But if you can merely amputate a limb, you may not kill the child; the fetus also has interests to be considered. Also, once the head or most of the body is out, the baby and mother have equal value and one cannot choose between them.

Not being Christian or a Gospel scholar, I don't know what Jesus would have said. Perhaps he liked fetus fricassee. But it seems unlikely.

Jeremy--again welcome back--now you seem to lack the guts to make a definitive statement about YOUR view about when a fetus becomes a person--thats fine--its just moral cowardice.

Now if you want some definitions of live birth (as alluded to above) we can take the WHO position on live birth: any cry or gasp for air from a delivered fetus--and as again pointed out, that point occurs about the six month of gestation.

Would you like to play in the game seriously or talk about feti holding their liquor or playing pool. That is even below your subterranean standards.

I am not sure if you use the term "evolve" correction. Maybe "mature" would be better. Indeed, I would suggest that while you might be able to argue that "evolve" made some sense during the first couple of months, by mid way through a pregnancy, the fetus is clearly fully human. Likely 1/3 of the way through.

Nevertheless, if you are going to look at it from a developmental point of view, the point of viability is somewhere around 5 months right now (I could be off by a bit). This means that premies who are born at that point of gestation are likely to survive (in the United States, but apparently not in the rest of the world, due to our apparently inferior health care system).

And, yet, in the normal course of events, fetuses stay in the womb for another 4 or so months after initial viability (often with a lot of that despised American medicine, but that is a different debate). And they continue to mature.

But, somehow, that 5 month premie, who is on the edge of viability, and will likely spend most of the rest of the time that he or she would normally have spent in the womb in the pre-natal unit of an American hospital, has the right to life, while the baby nearing full term is considered disposable by the government and liberals like Jeremy and Gail.

Mian:To me, the best thing about both soc sec and medicare is that, currently, everyone must be part of each program and there are no exceptions [except maybe military]. So the programs are as egalitarian as could be- of course now control freaks like Brooks want to change in the guise of equality via wealth re-distribution.

Let's go in order. Again, I ask you to humor me in my ignorance, when and how is it that the non-human fetus becomes a human fetus worthy of rights? I am so very interested in your response.

Seriously, Freeman, points (I guess) for trying to have a conversation with Jeremy about this. But keep in mind you're attempting a dialog about reproductive rights with someone who thinks a baby is, I dunno, "spontaneously generated" I guess you'd say? from a sperm.

Come on Jeremy--man up son--Freeman has asked the key question (which to make you feel better has no right or wrong answer)--Stop the shucking and jiving and just tell us when you think the point is when the zygote evolves to the point where it has legal rights. Bruce Hayden and I have both given you different approaches--we are asking you to give Freeman an answer--and I for one will not criticze your answer--I am simply curious as to when that point occurs in your value system

Dear Ms. Collins;I am sitting down. I am not crying. I am calm. Are you listening? Are your ready?

-Point #1:"the deficits are killing us". (For a rationale behind that conviction I'd add:Deficits between 2010 and 2020 would accumulate to a total of $82,219 per household measured in 2010 dollars. This represents a a crushing burden on the future generations. President Obama’s projected deficits through 2020 will double the publicly held national debt over the period 2010 to 2020. Over that time period, the national debt would increase from 60 per cent to 90 per cent of gross domestic product (from Prof. Charles Rowley)

-Point #2: As for your "wealthiest slice of the country is getting richer while paying less and less in taxes."I would point out that according to the IRS, which collects such data, the share of income taxes paid by the richest 1 percent almost equals the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 95 percent. Today, roughly a third of those who file a tax return don't pay any federal income tax at all, or get more in refundable tax credits than they pay in taxes.

So yes, those who are paying the bill are asking where the hell is all of the money going and they don't like the answers. And so if Average Joe worker and taxpayer in Wisconsin now expects his kids teacher to pay more into their health care and their retirement (and still pay less than he has to pay) I think that's reasonable. And if you'd like to suggest that the whole "union busting thing" is horrible then please first talk to the folks in Virginia.

(PS What the hell does abortion and contraception have to do with this anyway!?)

From Michael Barone via Insty:Unions, most of whose members are public employees, gave Democrats some $400 million in the 2008 election cycle. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the biggest public employee union, gave Democrats $90 million in the 2010 cycle.

Follow the money, Washington reporters like to say. The money in this case comes from taxpayers, present and future, who are the source of every penny of dues paid to public employee unions, who in turn spend much of that money on politics, almost all of it for Democrats. In effect, public employee unions are a mechanism by which every taxpayer is forced to fund the Democratic Party.

Again, these people ran out of cliches a long time ago.During 2007, the top 1 percent had actually paid more in federal income tax than the bottom 95 percent.

In 2008, the top-earning 5 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $159,619), however, still paid far more than the bottom 95 percent. The top 5 percent earned 34.7 percent of the nation's adjusted gross income, but paid approximately 58.7 percent of federal individual income taxes.

Pointing out Collins is ignorant on the topics she want to opine on has become a bore.

Jay - "By the way, I love the irony of this silly, ignorant little leftist kid trying to use scripture to justify abortion policy."

First of all, I'm not a little leftist kid, asshole.

With that said, I'm not "justifying" anything...only offering my opinion that a woman has a choice. I don't suggest it, nor do I think it's a good thing...but I do think it is sometimes necessary and not up to me to make that decision for someone else.

If you had to choose between your wife or loved one having an abortion and living or saving the life of the unborn...what would you do?

You've missed the question Jeremy--when does a fetus become a person--it looks like your suggesting its about the five month point when it can survive outside the womb (although a whole lot of perinatal care)--Great boy--you answered the question--although in a very round about fashion.

Collins is absolutely right. For the left, it IS about all those things. Of course for the rest of us it's about budgets or the lack thereof.

Why is it so hard for so many to understand that those making money are not willing to give up endless amounts of it for diminishing and poorly delivered services from those demanding their money. Isn't this obvious.

Simply put, we don't want what you are selling. Improve the product or lower the price like everybody else competing for other people's money.

So if viability is the point at which we all become persons, I take it that as medical technology advances, we'll all become people earlier? Say we improve NICU care to the point that a fetus can survive outside the womb at four months, then we'd all become persons at four months?

Personhood is then inextricably tied to the advancement of machines? Even when such machines are rarely used and hardly any births require their use?

@Freeman:I think viability is a good cutoff. Unfortunately, that is a cutoff that changes with technology. Some day, it may be possible to have an artificial womb. It puts the surrogate mothers out of business, though.

@Jeremy:Using biblical passages to bolster the case for abortion, when you're a self-admitted athiest, is as convincing as a laissez-faire capitalist using Karl Marx as an authority to promote 401K plans.This is an example of an argument in bad faith: You use a book that is the main source of belief for Christians the world over to make moral claims, yet you admit you think it's all bunk anyway.

My particular denomination does not recognize Bristol Palin as a prophet from God, either. The standard Jesus set is something to which we aspire, not that we are perfect. If believing in the Bible (or the Catholic authority) was all it took to not sin, then Europe in the middle ages would have been a touchy-feely paradise of Christian love.

Also, your little snark over playing pool with fetuses may seem funny, but if you've ever noticed, 2 month old babies can't play pool worth anything either. So are they not persons either?

I haven't read about the bill introduced in the Georgia legislature. I would doubt such a bill would even see the light of day in more liberal areas like Wisconsin, so I'm not sure how that has anything to do with the union protests in Madison.

A woman in imminent peril for her life could get an abortion. There are no qualms among rational people over that. This is an outlier case. The vast majority of abortions are not done for the extreme cases of "rape, incest, or life of the mother." If that were the case, Planned Parenthood could trumpet statistics that indicated that it were so. Personally, I would have problems with a woman being forced to carry a baby after rape or incest; others want to err on the side of the baby. The SCOTUS has consistenly upheld Roe v. Wade, and with Obama in office, possibly getting more S.C. picks, that's unlikely to change.

Gail is off the deep end if she thinks people are going to stand idly by and let contraception be banned. This is a country where a political movement can be started on Facebook, and a candidacy for President financed by small donations on the internet.

Secondly, before worrying about the coming theocracy, has it not occurred to you that Americans are split every way from Sunday about their religion? Conservative Catholics are a strong enough coalition to ban contraception in a state, let alone all 50 states? And overrule the Supreme Court?

Protestants may believe life begins at conception, but they're generally not averse to preventing the conception.

Why would viability be a good cut off? A few years ago, a five month old fetus would not have been a person with rights, but now it is? Why? There is no option to have the five month old fetus electively taken out early to be put into the NICU, so why would that even enter the equation?

Jeremy--Freeman is asking all the right questions--I am not sure my answers would be OK with her but I am willing to give it a shot: a fetus gains legal protection when it can exist outside the womb (aided by appropriate medical technology) and I recognize that the technology will continue to evolve and probably put the point of viability even earlier than it is now.

There--there's my answer. Freeman may disagree but at least we have a point we can start from.

Follow my lead son--just tell us what you think without the silly answering a question with a question. It isnt hard its liberating--try it

Well done Freeman. You reminded me of a recent biblical passage I read:

"Jesus entered the temple courts, and, while he was teaching, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him. “By what authority are you doing these things?” they asked. “And who gave you this authority?” Jesus replied, “I will also ask you one question. If you answer me, I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. John’s baptism—where did it come from? Was it from heaven, or of human origin?” They discussed it among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will ask, ‘Then why didn’t you believe him?’ But if we say, ‘Of human origin’—we are afraid of the people, for they all hold that John was a prophet.” So they answered Jesus, “We don’t know.”

Then he said, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.

I would point out that according to the IRS, which collects such data, the share of income taxes paid by the richest 1 percent almost equals the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 95 percent.

@PhilThe left uses similar statistics to point out how rich the top of the heap has become compared to the rest of us. They say that the wealth of the nation is concentrated at the top. The top 0.01% of families make more than $27 million per year. They also point out that the marginal tax rate on the top earners has decreased over time.

My only point is that when a woman is forced to have an abortion, or chooses to have one, it is her choice...and not the murder of a "person."

I just do not assign the same degree of importance to a fetus, as to that of a "viable," living, breathing human being...outside the womb of course.

If your wife, daughter or just a friend was told she had to have an abortion to save her life or had been raped or if incest was involved, would you testify against her in a court of law if she's prosecuted for murder?

Jeremy--here's freeman's question: "I am curious then, when is it that this non-person fetus "evolves" into a person fetus if not at birth? If it is a process rather than a sudden change, perhaps you could give me some idea of when the fetus is, say, 49% non-person and 51% person, making it more person than non-person and therefore worthy of not being killed on a whim?"

Nevermind the quibbling about abortion and taxes...the important thing here is that those evil libertarian Koch brothers are engaged in another nefarious libertarian plot to....um....leave us alone, I guess.

As for abortion in the case of rape: no, not allowable. Use emergency contraception. But, as few people share in my opinion on that, I'd be willing to compromise for the sake of outlawing all non-rape abortion, otherwise known as something like 99% of abortions.

As for the life of the mother: If saving a mother's life results in killing a fetus, this is obviously permissible. It's life versus life in that case and up to the mother.

Jeremy, Roger has kindly reposted the question for you. But I would also remind you that most computers allow the user to scroll up, and because the question appears multiple times, you are unlikely to miss it.

Jeremy--at least we dont have a problem with my definition--your other questions are important but tangential to the definition of personhood.

your questions are of course relevant and I am not one to say that abortion can be justified in certain circumstances--but those are questions that can be resolved BEFORE viability--Once viability occurs then abortion becomes problematic.

Rhhardin, it seems that quite a lot of people have an interest in the lives of these fetuses. Does their interest carry no weight? Only the interest of... who exactly? Women are currently allowed to get abortions even if the father and all grandparents object.

Roger - "I am curious then, when is it that this non-person fetus "evolves" into a person fetus if not at birth? If it is a process rather than a sudden change, perhaps you could give me some idea of when the fetus is, say, 49% non-person and 51% person, making it more person than non-person and therefore worthy of not being killed on a whim?"

Well, I guess I would have to say that a fetus becomes a "person" when it is actually surviving or "viable" outside of the womb.

And since most all pregnancies are just that after about six months or so, that's why I oppose late term abortions unless they are necessary to save the life of the mother.

I'm not a doctor, but I did spend a number of years selling ultrasound equipment and I've had plenty of conversations with OBGYN's over the years about all of this...and believe me...they're just as back and forth and opinionated as the average person on the street.

The doctors in Catholic hospitals were on one track...in other hospitals not so much.

Let's just leave it at this: I believe in a woman's choice...and I firmly believe that if men had babies...there would be no debate.

Damn Freeman--you are on fire today--re the question of abortion. IMO a woman is the receptacle, but it seems to me the father has equal rights about the "zygote." Grandparents are a bit more probablematic but relevant I think.. The idea that a woman is the SOLE adjudicator is a false assertion.

Okay, so if medical technology advances to the point that a fetus is viable at three months, you'll oppose abortions beyond that point?

All of you arguing viability, as there is no option for a woman to electively remove a fetus early to have it go to the NICU and as viability is determined by the advance of medical technology that is not utilized in the vast majority of all births, why is viability a factor in your analysis?

Freeman--my take (and good questions) viability is for me the sine qua non of personhood--its independent of medical technology and yes if medical technology can push the point of viability back in gestation then I can push my my point of viability back as well.

Jeremy: That presumes you have one, and anyway, I'm sorry I seem to have misplaced my tweezers. Too bad you are only half the man I am. Obviously, you're not getting anyone pregnant this afternoon, but spending it blogging about -- oooh, women's rights. It's no nice, you get in touch with your inner female. Short -- in every sense -- of outer male parts, don't spose you have much choice.

The safety net and government program and Unions are about budgets Gail, you jackass.While it might be worthwile to consider that money for programs grow on trees, in the real world huge govt programs take a bite out of our limited govt resources. Similarly unions have to have their benefits paid by companies which affect that companies bottom line.Are all liberals this stupid? Asked and answered.